https://www.theepochtimes.com/pfizers-c ... witter.com


The messenger RNA (mRNA) from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is able to enter human liver cells and is converted into DNA, according to Swedish researchers at Lund University.

The researchers found that when the mRNA vaccine enters the human liver cells, it triggers the cell’s DNA, which is inside the nucleus, to increase the production of the LINE-1 gene expression to make mRNA.

The mRNA then leaves the nucleus and enters the cell’s cytoplasm, where it translates into LINE-1 protein. A segment of the protein called the open reading frame-1, or ORF-1, then goes back into the nucleus, where it attaches to the vaccine’s mRNA and reverse transcribes into spike DNA.

Reverse transcription is when DNA is made from RNA, whereas the normal transcription process involves a portion of the DNA serving as a template to make an mRNA molecule inside the nucleus.

“In this study we present evidence that COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 is able to enter the human liver cell line Huh7 in vitro,” the researchers wrote in the study, published in Current Issues of Molecular Biology. “BNT162b2 mRNA is reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA as fast as 6 [hours] after BNT162b2 exposure.”

BNT162b2 is another name for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine that is marketed under the brand name Comirnaty.

The whole process occurred rapidly within six hours. The vaccine’s mRNA converting into DNA and being found inside the cell’s nucleus is something that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said would not happen.

“The genetic material delivered by mRNA vaccines never enters the nucleus of your cells,” the CDC said on its web page titled “Myths and Facts about COVID-19 Vaccines.”

This is the first time that researchers have shown in vitro or inside a petri dish how an mRNA vaccine is converted into DNA on a human liver cell line, and is what health experts and fact-checkers said for over a year couldn’t occur.

Citation:
https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/ ... b-44-00073

There's nothing here to debunk, other than some woolly language by CDC. What they should have said is that it never enters the germline, not that it never enters a cell's nucleus. Of course, those mythbusting pages are put together by CDC pretty quickly and only to quell people's fears in light of idiotic pseuds and their conspiracy bullshit. That particular nugget was in response to the notion that mRNA vaccines alter your genetic code, which is still nonsense, regardless of this.

The study itself is solid enough, published in a reasonably reputable journal (though I can't locate an impact factor). There are some important leaps being made by Epoch Times in their article, though. First, there's no indication that this RTDNA enters the germline. That the DNA finds expression in liver cells in vitro is not that surprising, especially given the nature of the cells in question:

The cell model that we used in this study is a carcinoma cell line, with active DNA replication which differs from non-dividing somatic cells. It has also been shown that Huh7 cells display significant different gene and protein expression including upregulated proteins involved in RNA metabolism

Now there are other cells in the body that have similar properties, as the study authors note (bone marrow cells, epithelia), so the study does raise some concerns. That said, they aren't necessarily major, thought further study is required. One of the big factors is concentration. Recall all that hoo-ha about hydroxychloroquine and the in vitro study showing that it had some impact on the replication of the virus via protease inhibition? That study also used liver cells. The notable thing about that was the concentrations. They required, if you remember, a dosage approximately ten times a safe dose for this effect to be observed. Worse, because of the way the body metabolises, to deliver that concentration to the liver in vivo would require an administered dose ten times that again, meaning that we'd need one hundred times the maximum safe dosage (ten times a lethal dose) in order to achieve those concentrations.

This is a game of gotcha, and it's weak AF. It's largely a nothing burger.

Epoch Times. Enough said.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So quas, as you're here touting this claim, then it's up to you to address the litany of problems with this study.

I mean, obviously, you're not just lending credence to a claim solely on the grounds of it conforming to your presuppositions, right? The conclusions of the paper must have persuaded you, so you no doubt understand the biochemistry involved.

Let's start easy, shall we?

BNT162b2 suspension was then added in cell culture media to reach final concentrations of 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 μg/mL. Huh7 cells were incubated with or without BNT162b2 for 6, 24, and 48 h. Cells were washed thoroughly with PBS and harvested by trypsinization and stored in −80 °C until further use.

Why did they pick primers that amplified only this segment of the gene for spike protein?

200,000 cells.... why did they use micrograms of dosage for so few cells? This is vastly higher concentration than you'd ever find in any vaccination - so can you explain the logic for this Quas?

HuH-7 is a cancer cell line taken from the liver cancer of a 57-year-old Japanese male, and consequently, really fucked up by the cancer.

Can you explain why they used HuH-7 reference genome profile?

I've got about 30 more questions about the study I expect you'll be able to answer for us quas, because obviously you made sure you understood the paper before citing it here at rationalskepticism, right?

Look forward to your explanations.

hackenslash wrote: (though I can't locate an impact factor)

2.695 according to wiki

Why did the researchers choose a cell line with such a high level of LINE-1, quas?


https://www.nature.com/articles/gim2015119

Long interspersed nuclear element-1 (L1) retrotransposons are jumping genes that comprise 17% of human DNA. They utilize a ‘‘copy-and-paste’’ mechanism to propagate themselves throughout the genome via RNA intermediates, a process termed retrotransposition. L1s are active in the germ line and during embryogenesis, yet they are epigenetically suppressed in somatic cells. In cancer cells, however, L1s are aberrantly activated and may have a role in genome instability, one of the hallmarks of cancer pathogenesis.

How is that not affecting the test, and how does it not have implications for any possible relevance to what happens in a healthy cell line?

Why did they even only use one single cell line?

The cell model that we used in this study is a carcinoma cell line, with active DNA replication which differs from non-dividing somatic cells. It has also been shown that Huh7 cells display significant different gene and protein expression including upregulated proteins involved in RNA metabolism [56]. However, cell proliferation is also active in several human tissues such as the bone marrow or basal layers of epithelia as well as during embryogenesis, and it is therefore necessary to examine the effect of BNT162b2 on genomic integrity under such conditions. Furthermore, effective retrotransposition of LINE-1 has also been reported in non-dividing and terminally differentiated cells, such as human neurons [57,58].

So no evidence in this paper that the sequence actually becomes integrated into the genome? Quas, to show that the sequence has been reverse-transcribed, why didn’t they do a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of the entire spike sequence???

Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Goes Into Liver Cells

and Is Converted to DNA

Where in the study does it show this, quas?

This is way above my head but I'm happy there are others here who can ask critical questions. I saw a report of this study on CNN, but I'm still left with the question: "Does it matter?" I guess they're working on that now.

The_Piper wrote::lol: This is way above my head but I'm happy there are others here who can ask critical questions. I saw a report of this study on CNN, but I'm still left with the question: "Does it matter?" I guess they're working on that now.

I haven't seen any news on this (aside from the article quas linked to) - I just read the paper, looked up some facts that are instantly and widely available, and I am now looking through critical reception by relevant experts.

Let's be honest... does anyone even think quas got past the title of the report in a paper already established as...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times

The Epoch Media Group's news sites and YouTube channels have spread conspiracy theories such as QAnon and anti-vaccine misinformation,[32] and false claims of election fraud in the 2020 United States presidential election.[36] In 2020, The New York Times called it a "global-scale misinformation machine".[27]

Fact-checking is hard and time consuming. But knee-jerk acceptance of claims based solely on one's personal presuppositions is fucking dangerous - the real world gives no fucks about what vacant ideology you subscribe to.

I didn't even get halfway through the article and that site wants my email to continue. Now that I know their reputation, no thanks.

Dick Scratcher in dick scratching incident. “We’re surprised” says no-one at all.

Still waiting quas.

If you think you can dump ignorant disinformation on this site, well, let's just say you'd better be able to put your money where your mouth is.

He seems to be playing postman's bollocks.